Certain Access Control Systems and Components Thereof; Notice of the Commission's Final Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Issuance of Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of the Investigation, 13517-13519 [2018-06293]

Download as PDF sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 61 / Thursday, March 29, 2018 / Notices Acecom, Inc.—San Antonio d/b/a InkSell.com, 4212 Thousand Oaks Drive, San Antonio, Texas 78217 ACM Technologies, Inc., 2535 Research Drive, Corona, California 92882 Arlington Industries, Inc., 1616 S. Lakeside Drive, Waukegan, Illinois 60085 Bluedog Distribution Inc., 450 North Park Road, Suite 810, Hollywood, Florida 33021 Do It Wiser LLC d/b/a Image Toner, 4255 Trotters Way #8A, Alpharetta, Georgia 30004 EIS Office Solutions, Inc., 314 Garden Oaks Boulevard, Houston, Texas 77018–5502 eReplacements, LLC, 600 E. Dallas Road, Suite 200, Grapevine, Texas 76051 Frontier Imaging Inc., 1250 W Artesia Boulevard, Compton, California 90220 Garvey’s Office Products, Inc., 7500 N. Caldwell Avenue, Niles, Illinois 60714–3808 Global Cartridges, 918 Chula Vista Ave., Suite #3, Burlingame, California 94010 GPC Trading Co., Limited d/b/a GPC Image, Room 1103, Hang Seng Mongkok Building, 677 Nathan Road, Kowloon, Hong Kong Hong Kong BoZe Co., Limited d/b/a Greensky, Flat/Rm A 27/F, Billion Plaza 2, 10 Cheung Yee Street, Lai Chi Kok, KL Hong Kong Master Print Supplies, Inc. d/b/a HQ Products, 802 Burlway Road, Burlingame, California 94010 i8 International, Inc. d/b/a Ink4Work.com, 19961 Harrison Avenue, City of Industry, California 91789 Ink Technologies Printer Supplies, LLC, 7600 McEwen Road, Dayton, Ohio 45459 LD Products, Inc., 3700 Cover Street, Long Beach, California 90808 Linkyo Corp. d/b/a SuperMediaStore.com, 629 South Sixth Avenue, La Puente, California 91746 CLT Computers, Inc. d/b/a Multiwave and MWave, 20153 Paseo Del Prado, Walnut, California 91789 Imaging Supplies Investors, LLC d/b/a, SuppliesOutlet.com, SuppliesWholesalers.com, and, OnlineTechStores.com, 5440 Reno Corporate Drive, Reno, Nevada 89511 Online Tech Stores, LLC d/b/a, SuppliesOutlet.com, SuppliesWholesalers.com, and OnlineTechStores.com, 190 Monroe Avenue, Suite 600, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503–2628 Kuhlmann Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Precision Roller, 2102 W. Quail Avenue, Suite 1, Phoenix, Arizona 85027 VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Mar 28, 2018 Jkt 244001 Print After Print, Inc. d/b/a OutOfToner.com, 2640 E. Rose Garden Lane, Phoenix, Arizona 85050 Fairland, LLC d/b/a ProPrint, 155 N. Riverview Drive, Suite 100, Anaheim Hills, California 92808 Reliable Imaging Computer Products, Inc., 9659 Balboa Boulevard, Northridge, California 91325 Apex Excel Limited d/b/a ShopAt247, 19223 Colima Road, Unit 943, Rowland Heights, California 91748 The Supplies Guys, LLC, 590 Centerville Road #388, Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17601 Billiontree Technology USA Inc. d/b/a Toner Kingdom, 19945 Harrison Avenue, City of Industry, California 91789 FTrade Inc. d/b/a ValueToner, 1324 Forest Avenue, Suite 406, Staten Island, New York 10302 V4INK, Inc., 2760 E Philadelphia Street, Ontario, California 91761 World Class Ink Supply, Inc., 47 Cooper Street, Rear Suite, Woodbury, New Jersey 08096 9010–8077 Quebec Inc. d/b/a Zeetoner, 6 Rue Finch, Dollard-Des-Ormeaux, Quebec, Canada H9A 3G9 Zinyaw LLC d/b/a TonerPirate.com and Supply District, 1321 Upland Drive #1359, Houston, Texas 77043 (c) The Office of Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Suite 401, Washington, DC 20436; and (3) For the investigation so instituted, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, U.S. International Trade Commission, shall designate the presiding Administrative Law Judge. Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be submitted by the named respondents in accordance with section 210.13 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such responses will be considered by the Commission if received not later than 20 days after the date of service by the Commission of the complaint and the notice of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation will not be granted unless good cause therefor is shown. Failure of a respondent to file a timely response to each allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent, to find the facts to be as PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 13517 alleged in the complaint and this notice and to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing such findings, and may result in the issuance of an exclusion order or a cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent. By order of the Commission. Issued: March 26, 2018. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2018–06378 Filed 3–28–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–1016] Certain Access Control Systems and Components Thereof; Notice of the Commission’s Final Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Issuance of Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of the Investigation U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has found a violation of section 337 in this investigation and has issued a limited exclusion order prohibiting importation of infringing access control systems and components thereof and issued cease and desist orders directed to the following respondents: Techtronic Industries Company Ltd. of Tsuen Wan, Hong Kong (‘‘TTi HK’’); Techtronic Industries North America Inc. of Hunt Valley, Maryland (‘‘TTi NA’’); One World Technologies, Inc. of Anderson, South Carolina (‘‘One World’’); and OWT Industries, Inc. of Pickens, South Carolina (‘‘OWT’’). The investigation is terminated. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Panyin A. Hughes, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202– 205–3042. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202–205–2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (https://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this investigation SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM 29MRN1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES 13518 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 61 / Thursday, March 29, 2018 / Notices may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at https:// edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202–205–1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation on August 9, 2016, based on a complaint filed by The Chamberlain Group, Inc. of Elmhurst, Illinois (‘‘Chamberlain’’ or ‘‘CGI’’). 81 FR 52713 (Aug. 9, 2016). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain access control systems and components thereof by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1, 10–12, and 18–25 of U.S. Patent No. 7,196,611 (‘‘the ’611 patent’’); claims 1– 4, 7–12, 15, and 16 of the ’319 patent; and claims 7, 11–13, 15–23, and 34–36 of the ’336 patent. Id. The notice of investigation named the following respondents: TTi HK; TTi NA; One World; OWT; ET Technology (Wuxi) Co., Ltd. of Zhejiang, China (collectively, ‘‘Respondents’’); and Ryobi Technologies Inc. of Anderson, South Carolina (‘‘Ryobi’’). Id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations is not a party to the investigation. On October 27, 2016, the Commission determined not to review the ALJ’s order (Order No. 4) granting a motion to amend the Notice of Investigation to include the following two additional respondents: Techtronic Trading Limited of Kwai Chung, Hong Kong; and Techtronic Industries Factory Outlets Inc., d/b/a Direct Tools Factory Outlet of Anderson, South Carolina (collectively, ‘‘Techtronic’’). See Order No. 4, Comm’n Notice of Non-Review (Oct. 27, 2016). On November 7, 2016, the Commission determined not to review the ALJ’s order (Order No. 6) terminating the investigation as to Ryobi. See Order No. 6, Comm’n Notice of Non-Review (Nov. 7, 2016). On March 15, 2017, the Commission determined not to review the ALJ’s order (Order No. 15) granting a motion to terminate the investigation as to Techtronic. Order No. 15, Comm’n Notice of Non-Review (Mar. 15, 2017). On March 20, 2017, the Commission determined not to review the ALJ’s order (Order No. 18) granting a motion to terminate the investigation as to claims 10, 19–20, and 22 of the ’611 patent and claims 7, 11–13, 15–18, 35, and 36 of the ’336 patent. Order No. 18; VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Mar 28, 2018 Jkt 244001 Comm’n Notice of Non-Review (Mar. 20, 2017). On March 27, 2017, the ALJ issued Order No. 23 granting Respondents’ motion for summary determination of non-infringement of the asserted claims of the ’319 patent, stemming from the ALJ’s construction of the claim term ‘‘wall console’’ to mean ‘‘a wallmounted control unit including a passive infrared detector.’’ See Order No. 13 (Markman Order at 80). The ALJ held an evidentiary hearing from May 1, 2017 through May 3, 2017, on issues solely relating to the ’336 patent. On May 3, the Commission determined to review Order No. 23 that granted Respondents’ motion for summary determination of noninfringement of the ’319 patent. On review, the Commission determined to construe ‘‘wall console’’ as a ‘‘wallmounted control unit,’’ vacated Order No. 23, and remanded the investigation as to the ’319 patent to the ALJ for further proceedings. See Comm’n Op. (May 5, 2017) at 1–2. On May 31, 2017, the Commission determined not to review the ALJ’s order (Order No. 28) granting a motion to terminate the investigation as to all of the pending claims of the ’611 patent. Order No. 28; Comm’n Notice of NonReview (May 31, 2017). The ALJ held a second evidentiary hearing from July 12, 2017, through July 13, 2017, on issues relating to the ’319 patent. On November 9, 2017, the Commission determined not to review the ALJ’s order (Order No. 36) granting a motion to terminate the investigation as to certain accused products and claims 19–23 of the ’336 patent. Order No. 36; Comm’n Notice of Non-Review (Nov. 9, 2017). On October 23, 2017, the ALJ issued his final ID, finding a violation of section 337 by Respondents in connection with claims 1–4, 7–12, 15, and 16 of the ’319 patent. Specifically, the ALJ found that the Commission has subject matter jurisdiction, in rem jurisdiction over the accused products, and in personam jurisdiction over Respondents. ID at 24–26. The ALJ also found that Chamberlain satisfied the importation requirement of section 337 (19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(1)(B)). Id. The ALJ further found that the accused products directly infringe asserted claims 1–4, 7– 12, 15, and 16 of the ’319 patent, and that Respondents induce infringement of those claims. See ID at 130–141, 144. The ALJ also found that Respondents failed to establish that the asserted claims of the ’319 patent are invalid for obviousness. ID at 151–212. With PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 respect to the ’336 patent, the ALJ found that Respondents do not directly or indirectly infringe asserted claim 34 and that claim 34 is not invalid as obvious. ID at 72–74, 105–119. The ALJ further found that claims 15, 19, and 34 of the ’336 patent are invalid under 35 U.S.C. 101 for reciting unpatentable subject matter and that claim 15 is invalid for anticipation but that claims 12, 14, and 19 have not been shown invalid for anticipation. ID at 74–103. Finally, the ALJ found that Chamberlain established the existence of a domestic industry that practices the asserted patents under 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(2). See ID at 257–261, 288–294. Also on October 23, 2017, the ALJ issued his recommended determination on remedy and bonding. Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bonding (‘‘RD’’). The ALJ recommends that in the event the Commission finds a violation of section 337, the Commission should issue a limited exclusion order prohibiting the importation of Respondents’ accused products and components thereof that infringe the asserted claims of the ’319 patent. RD at 2. The ALJ also recommends issuance of cease and desist orders against respondents Techtronic Industries Company Ltd., Techtronic Industries North America Inc., One World Technologies, Inc., and OWT Industries, Inc. based on the presence of commercially significant inventory in the United States. RD at 5. With respect to the amount of bond that should be posted during the period of Presidential review, the ALJ recommends that the Commission set a bond in the amount of zero (i.e., no bond) during the period of Presidential review. RD at 6–7. On November 6, 2017, Respondents filed a petition for review as to the ’319 patent and a contingent petition for review as to the ’336 patent. See Respondents’ Petition for Review. Also on November 6, 2017, Chamberlain filed a petition for review of the ID, primarily challenging the ALJ’s findings of no violation of section 337 as it pertains to the ’336 patent. See Complainant’s Petition for Review of Initial Determination on Violation of Section 337. On November 14, 2017, Chamberlain and Respondents filed their respective responses to the petitions for review. See Complainant’s Response to Respondents’ Petition for Review of Initial Determination on Violation of Section 337; Respondents’ Response to Complainant’s Petition for Review. On December 22, 2017, the Commission determined to review the final ID in part. 82 FR 61792–94 (Dec. 29, 2017). Specifically, for the ’319 E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM 29MRN1 13519 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 61 / Thursday, March 29, 2018 / Notices patent the Commission determined to review (1) the ID’s finding that a combination of prior art references Doppelt, Jacobs, and Gilbert fail to render the asserted claims obvious; and (2) the ID’s finding that a combination of prior art references Matsuoka, Doppelt, and Eckel fail to render the asserted claims obvious. For the ’336 patent the Commission determined to review (1) the ID’s finding that claim 34 recites ineligible patent subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101; and (2) the ID’s finding that Pruessel, either alone or in combination with Koestler, fails to render claim 34 obvious. The Commission requested the parties to brief certain issues. Id. On January 5, 2018, the parties filed submissions to the Commission’s question and on remedy, the public interest, and bonding. See Complainant’s Response to Request for Written Submissions Regarding Issues Under Review; Respondents’ Response to Request for Written Submissions Regarding Issues Under Review. On January 12, 2018, the parties filed reply submissions. See Complainant’s Reply to Respondents’ Submission Addressing the Commission’s December 22, 2017 Notice; Respondents’ Reply to Complainant’s Submission Regarding Issues Under Review. Having examined the record of this investigation, including the final ID, and the parties’ submissions, for the ’319 patent the Commission has determined to (1) affirm the ALJ’s finding that a combination of prior art references Doppelt, Jacobs, and Gilbert fail to render the asserted claims obvious and (2) affirm the ALJ’s finding that a combination of prior art references Matsuoka, Doppelt, and Eckel fail to render the asserted claims obvious, but reverse the ALJ’s finding that Eckel is analogous art. For the ’336 patent the Commission has determined to (1) affirm the ALJ’s finding that Pruessel, either alone or in combination with Koestler, fails to render claim 34 obvious and (2) take no position on the ALJ’s finding that claim 34 recites ineligible patent subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101. The Commission adopts the ID’s findings to the extent they are not inconsistent with the Commission opinion issued herewith. Having found a violation of section 337 in this investigation, the Commission has determined that the appropriate form of relief is: (1) A limited exclusion order prohibiting the unlicensed entry of access control systems and components thereof that infringe one or more of claims 1–4, 7– 12, 15, and 16 of the ’319 patent that are manufactured by, or on behalf of, or are VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Mar 28, 2018 Jkt 244001 imported by or on behalf of Respondents or any of their affiliated companies, parents, subsidiaries, agents, or other related business entities, or their successors or assigns, are excluded from entry for consumption into the United States, entry for consumption from a foreign-trade zone, or withdrawal from a warehouse for consumption, for the remaining term of the ’319 patent except under license of the patent owner or as provided by law; and (2) cease and desist orders prohibiting TTi HK, TTi NA, One World, and OWT from conducting any of the following activities in the United States: Importing, selling, marketing, advertising, distributing, transferring (except for exportation), and soliciting U.S. agents or distributors for, access control systems and components thereof covered by one or more of claims 1–4, 7–12, 15, and 16 of the ’319 patent. The Commission has also determined that the public interest factors enumerated in section 337(d) and (f) (19 U.S.C. 1337(d) and (f)) do not preclude issuance of the limited exclusion order or cease and desist orders. Finally, the Commission has determined that a bond in the amount of zero is required to permit temporary importation during the period of Presidential review (19 U.S.C. 1337(j)) of access control system and components thereof that are subject to the remedial orders. The Commission’s orders and opinion were delivered to the President and to the United States Trade Representative on the day of their issuance. The authority for the Commission’s determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in Part 210 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210). By order of the Commission. Issued: March 23, 2018. Katherine Hiner, Supervisory Attorney. [FR Doc. 2018–06293 Filed 3–28–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA–392] Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: Chattem Chemicals, Inc. ACTION: Notice; Correction. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) published a SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 document in the Federal Register on February 6, 2018, concerning a notice of application that inadvertently did not include the controlled substance levorphanol (9220). Correction In the Federal Register on February 6, 2018, in FR Doc No: 2018–02343 (83 FR 5274), correct the table to include the following basic class of controlled substance: Controlled substance Levorphanol ............ Drug code 9220 Schedule II Dated: March 15, 2018. Susan A. Gibson, Deputy Assistant Administrator. [FR Doc. 2018–06327 Filed 3–28–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410–09–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA–392] Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Fisher Clinical Services, Inc. ACTION: Notice of application. Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before April 30, 2018. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application on or before April 30, 2018. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearing must be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Administrator, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearing should also be sent to: (1) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and (2) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with DATES: E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM 29MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 61 (Thursday, March 29, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13517-13519]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-06293]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-1016]


Certain Access Control Systems and Components Thereof; Notice of 
the Commission's Final Determination Finding a Violation of Section 
337; Issuance of Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders; 
Termination of the Investigation

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has found a violation of section 337 in this investigation 
and has issued a limited exclusion order prohibiting importation of 
infringing access control systems and components thereof and issued 
cease and desist orders directed to the following respondents: 
Techtronic Industries Company Ltd. of Tsuen Wan, Hong Kong (``TTi 
HK''); Techtronic Industries North America Inc. of Hunt Valley, 
Maryland (``TTi NA''); One World Technologies, Inc. of Anderson, South 
Carolina (``One World''); and OWT Industries, Inc. of Pickens, South 
Carolina (``OWT''). The investigation is terminated.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Panyin A. Hughes, Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202-205-3042. Copies of non-
confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are 
or will be available for inspection during official business hours 
(8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. 
International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, 
telephone 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission 
may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (https://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this investigation

[[Page 13518]]

may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information 
on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD 
terminal on 202-205-1810.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation 
on August 9, 2016, based on a complaint filed by The Chamberlain Group, 
Inc. of Elmhurst, Illinois (``Chamberlain'' or ``CGI''). 81 FR 52713 
(Aug. 9, 2016). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), in the importation 
into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within 
the United States after importation of certain access control systems 
and components thereof by reason of infringement of one or more of 
claims 1, 10-12, and 18-25 of U.S. Patent No. 7,196,611 (``the '611 
patent''); claims 1-4, 7-12, 15, and 16 of the '319 patent; and claims 
7, 11-13, 15-23, and 34-36 of the '336 patent. Id. The notice of 
investigation named the following respondents: TTi HK; TTi NA; One 
World; OWT; ET Technology (Wuxi) Co., Ltd. of Zhejiang, China 
(collectively, ``Respondents''); and Ryobi Technologies Inc. of 
Anderson, South Carolina (``Ryobi''). Id. The Office of Unfair Import 
Investigations is not a party to the investigation.
    On October 27, 2016, the Commission determined not to review the 
ALJ's order (Order No. 4) granting a motion to amend the Notice of 
Investigation to include the following two additional respondents: 
Techtronic Trading Limited of Kwai Chung, Hong Kong; and Techtronic 
Industries Factory Outlets Inc., d/b/a Direct Tools Factory Outlet of 
Anderson, South Carolina (collectively, ``Techtronic''). See Order No. 
4, Comm'n Notice of Non-Review (Oct. 27, 2016).
    On November 7, 2016, the Commission determined not to review the 
ALJ's order (Order No. 6) terminating the investigation as to Ryobi. 
See Order No. 6, Comm'n Notice of Non-Review (Nov. 7, 2016).
    On March 15, 2017, the Commission determined not to review the 
ALJ's order (Order No. 15) granting a motion to terminate the 
investigation as to Techtronic. Order No. 15, Comm'n Notice of Non-
Review (Mar. 15, 2017).
    On March 20, 2017, the Commission determined not to review the 
ALJ's order (Order No. 18) granting a motion to terminate the 
investigation as to claims 10, 19-20, and 22 of the '611 patent and 
claims 7, 11-13, 15-18, 35, and 36 of the '336 patent. Order No. 18; 
Comm'n Notice of Non-Review (Mar. 20, 2017).
    On March 27, 2017, the ALJ issued Order No. 23 granting 
Respondents' motion for summary determination of non-infringement of 
the asserted claims of the '319 patent, stemming from the ALJ's 
construction of the claim term ``wall console'' to mean ``a wall-
mounted control unit including a passive infrared detector.'' See Order 
No. 13 (Markman Order at 80).
    The ALJ held an evidentiary hearing from May 1, 2017 through May 3, 
2017, on issues solely relating to the '336 patent.
    On May 3, the Commission determined to review Order No. 23 that 
granted Respondents' motion for summary determination of non-
infringement of the '319 patent. On review, the Commission determined 
to construe ``wall console'' as a ``wall-mounted control unit,'' 
vacated Order No. 23, and remanded the investigation as to the '319 
patent to the ALJ for further proceedings. See Comm'n Op. (May 5, 2017) 
at 1-2.
    On May 31, 2017, the Commission determined not to review the ALJ's 
order (Order No. 28) granting a motion to terminate the investigation 
as to all of the pending claims of the '611 patent. Order No. 28; 
Comm'n Notice of Non-Review (May 31, 2017).
    The ALJ held a second evidentiary hearing from July 12, 2017, 
through July 13, 2017, on issues relating to the '319 patent.
    On November 9, 2017, the Commission determined not to review the 
ALJ's order (Order No. 36) granting a motion to terminate the 
investigation as to certain accused products and claims 19-23 of the 
'336 patent. Order No. 36; Comm'n Notice of Non-Review (Nov. 9, 2017).
    On October 23, 2017, the ALJ issued his final ID, finding a 
violation of section 337 by Respondents in connection with claims 1-4, 
7-12, 15, and 16 of the '319 patent. Specifically, the ALJ found that 
the Commission has subject matter jurisdiction, in rem jurisdiction 
over the accused products, and in personam jurisdiction over 
Respondents. ID at 24-26. The ALJ also found that Chamberlain satisfied 
the importation requirement of section 337 (19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(1)(B)). 
Id. The ALJ further found that the accused products directly infringe 
asserted claims 1-4, 7-12, 15, and 16 of the '319 patent, and that 
Respondents induce infringement of those claims. See ID at 130-141, 
144. The ALJ also found that Respondents failed to establish that the 
asserted claims of the '319 patent are invalid for obviousness. ID at 
151-212. With respect to the '336 patent, the ALJ found that 
Respondents do not directly or indirectly infringe asserted claim 34 
and that claim 34 is not invalid as obvious. ID at 72-74, 105-119. The 
ALJ further found that claims 15, 19, and 34 of the '336 patent are 
invalid under 35 U.S.C. 101 for reciting unpatentable subject matter 
and that claim 15 is invalid for anticipation but that claims 12, 14, 
and 19 have not been shown invalid for anticipation. ID at 74-103. 
Finally, the ALJ found that Chamberlain established the existence of a 
domestic industry that practices the asserted patents under 19 U.S.C. 
1337(a)(2). See ID at 257-261, 288-294.
    Also on October 23, 2017, the ALJ issued his recommended 
determination on remedy and bonding. Recommended Determination on 
Remedy and Bonding (``RD''). The ALJ recommends that in the event the 
Commission finds a violation of section 337, the Commission should 
issue a limited exclusion order prohibiting the importation of 
Respondents' accused products and components thereof that infringe the 
asserted claims of the '319 patent. RD at 2. The ALJ also recommends 
issuance of cease and desist orders against respondents Techtronic 
Industries Company Ltd., Techtronic Industries North America Inc., One 
World Technologies, Inc., and OWT Industries, Inc. based on the 
presence of commercially significant inventory in the United States. RD 
at 5. With respect to the amount of bond that should be posted during 
the period of Presidential review, the ALJ recommends that the 
Commission set a bond in the amount of zero (i.e., no bond) during the 
period of Presidential review. RD at 6-7.
    On November 6, 2017, Respondents filed a petition for review as to 
the '319 patent and a contingent petition for review as to the '336 
patent. See Respondents' Petition for Review. Also on November 6, 2017, 
Chamberlain filed a petition for review of the ID, primarily 
challenging the ALJ's findings of no violation of section 337 as it 
pertains to the '336 patent. See Complainant's Petition for Review of 
Initial Determination on Violation of Section 337.
    On November 14, 2017, Chamberlain and Respondents filed their 
respective responses to the petitions for review. See Complainant's 
Response to Respondents' Petition for Review of Initial Determination 
on Violation of Section 337; Respondents' Response to Complainant's 
Petition for Review.
    On December 22, 2017, the Commission determined to review the final 
ID in part. 82 FR 61792-94 (Dec. 29, 2017). Specifically, for the '319

[[Page 13519]]

patent the Commission determined to review (1) the ID's finding that a 
combination of prior art references Doppelt, Jacobs, and Gilbert fail 
to render the asserted claims obvious; and (2) the ID's finding that a 
combination of prior art references Matsuoka, Doppelt, and Eckel fail 
to render the asserted claims obvious. For the '336 patent the 
Commission determined to review (1) the ID's finding that claim 34 
recites ineligible patent subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101; and (2) 
the ID's finding that Pruessel, either alone or in combination with 
Koestler, fails to render claim 34 obvious. The Commission requested 
the parties to brief certain issues. Id. On January 5, 2018, the 
parties filed submissions to the Commission's question and on remedy, 
the public interest, and bonding. See Complainant's Response to Request 
for Written Submissions Regarding Issues Under Review; Respondents' 
Response to Request for Written Submissions Regarding Issues Under 
Review. On January 12, 2018, the parties filed reply submissions. See 
Complainant's Reply to Respondents' Submission Addressing the 
Commission's December 22, 2017 Notice; Respondents' Reply to 
Complainant's Submission Regarding Issues Under Review.
    Having examined the record of this investigation, including the 
final ID, and the parties' submissions, for the '319 patent the 
Commission has determined to (1) affirm the ALJ's finding that a 
combination of prior art references Doppelt, Jacobs, and Gilbert fail 
to render the asserted claims obvious and (2) affirm the ALJ's finding 
that a combination of prior art references Matsuoka, Doppelt, and Eckel 
fail to render the asserted claims obvious, but reverse the ALJ's 
finding that Eckel is analogous art. For the '336 patent the Commission 
has determined to (1) affirm the ALJ's finding that Pruessel, either 
alone or in combination with Koestler, fails to render claim 34 obvious 
and (2) take no position on the ALJ's finding that claim 34 recites 
ineligible patent subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101. The Commission 
adopts the ID's findings to the extent they are not inconsistent with 
the Commission opinion issued herewith.
    Having found a violation of section 337 in this investigation, the 
Commission has determined that the appropriate form of relief is: (1) A 
limited exclusion order prohibiting the unlicensed entry of access 
control systems and components thereof that infringe one or more of 
claims 1-4, 7-12, 15, and 16 of the '319 patent that are manufactured 
by, or on behalf of, or are imported by or on behalf of Respondents or 
any of their affiliated companies, parents, subsidiaries, agents, or 
other related business entities, or their successors or assigns, are 
excluded from entry for consumption into the United States, entry for 
consumption from a foreign-trade zone, or withdrawal from a warehouse 
for consumption, for the remaining term of the '319 patent except under 
license of the patent owner or as provided by law; and (2) cease and 
desist orders prohibiting TTi HK, TTi NA, One World, and OWT from 
conducting any of the following activities in the United States: 
Importing, selling, marketing, advertising, distributing, transferring 
(except for exportation), and soliciting U.S. agents or distributors 
for, access control systems and components thereof covered by one or 
more of claims 1-4, 7-12, 15, and 16 of the '319 patent.
    The Commission has also determined that the public interest factors 
enumerated in section 337(d) and (f) (19 U.S.C. 1337(d) and (f)) do not 
preclude issuance of the limited exclusion order or cease and desist 
orders. Finally, the Commission has determined that a bond in the 
amount of zero is required to permit temporary importation during the 
period of Presidential review (19 U.S.C. 1337(j)) of access control 
system and components thereof that are subject to the remedial orders. 
The Commission's orders and opinion were delivered to the President and 
to the United States Trade Representative on the day of their issuance.
    The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in 
section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and 
in Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 
part 210).

    By order of the Commission.

     Issued: March 23, 2018.
Katherine Hiner,
Supervisory Attorney.
[FR Doc. 2018-06293 Filed 3-28-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7020-02-P